Klinsmann on the Costa Rica snow game: “I didn’t call God to give us some snow”

SAN JOSE, Costa Rica — It’s been almost six months, but some animosity still remains.

The U.S. Men’s National Team beat Costa Rica, 1-0, back in March in a memorable World Cup qualifier in Denver, but some lingering resentment remains from the Costa Rican Federation, and Costa Rican fans, over the match not being halted due to that night’s blizzard-like conditions. That might explain some of the Ticos’ gamesmanship ahead of Friday’s rematch at Estadio Nacional, including forcing the Americans to go through a public part of the airport on Tuesday night, not helping them find a training site and not providing the team with game balls for Wednesday’s training session (the U.S. trained with its own balls).

U.S. head coach Jurgen Klinsmann understands why that frustration exists but he made it clear before Wednesday’s practice that the focus for his side lies on Friday’s World Cup qualifier and all that is at stake for the two nations.

“That was not our fault. I didn’t call God to give us some snow,” said Klinsmann of the match played at Dick’s Sporting Goods Park. “It was difficult for both teams to play that game but I think you have now a situation, Costa Rica (with) 11 points, close to the World Cup, we have 13 points, close to the World Cup. We both want to get there and I think it’s going to be exciting.”

The two teams may be close to one another in the Hexagonal standings, but the U.S. has had Costa Rica’s number as of late. Aside from beating the Ticos in March, the Americans also defeated Costa Rica, 1-0, in a Gold Cup group stage match back in July.

Still, Klinsmann is anticipating another tough game on Friday as the Ticos attempt to move one step closer to the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

“We’ve played now a few times over the last two years and it’s a wonderful team. It’s a team with very, very good individual players,” said Klinsmann. “You look at Bryan Ruiz, you look at (Alvaro) Saborio that we know very well obviously in the United States, you look at (Bryan) Oviedo, you look at (Celso) Borges, you look at (Junior) Diaz that plays overseas, (Michael) Barrantes. It’s a team full of talent, a lot of talent and that’s why we have a lot of respect for this team.

“But I also think that we have a lot of talent in our group, if you look at Clint Dempsey, or a Landon Donovan or a Michael Bradley, Jermaine Jones, and Tim Howard in goal. It’s exciting, it’s exciting for the fans to come to the stadium, it’s exciting for everybody in front of the television to watch this game. We’re looking forward to it.”

The challenge for the U.S. will be a big one. The Americans, who are riding a 12-game winning streak, have never won a World Cup qualifier in Costa Rica. In fact, they have endured their fare share of horrors in San Jose, including a humbling 3-1 defeat at the famed Estadio Saprissa during the 2010 World Cup qualifying cycle.

All in all, Costa Rica is 7-0-1 in qualifiers at home against the U.S. and the Ticos have won the last seven by a combined score of 17-6.

“That shows the strength of Costa Rica,” said Klinsmann. “It shows how strong they are in their own stadium, in their own country, that they give everything they have for their country and it’s impressive, so you’ve got to give a big compliment to them.

“Sooner or later we would love to win a World Cup qualifier here, so we try it on Friday night. We will give everything we have and after the game we will know if it was enough or not.”

If it is enough, the U.S. would essentially have one foot in the door for next summer’s World Cup. Klinsmann, however, made sure to point out that his team is not looking at Friday’s match in that manner.

Instead, they are focused simply on trying to win three points on the road against a familiar foe.

“We’re not thinking of that. We know it’s going to be a difficult game,” said Klinsmann. “Coach (Jorge Luis) Pinto will do everything to prepare his team, we do everything to prepare our team. It’s going to be an exciting game, I think people will watch a very good game, and both teams are getting closer to the World Cup and therefore we’re not thinking about what could happen somewhere else, we’re not thinking about Mexico.

“We only think about the Friday night game and we give everything we have.”

Of course we didn’t plan, or even hope for, snow. However, I still feel as though the protest was warranted. Conditions were such that they dramatically affected play to the point where the product on the field was significantly diminished. It was a horrible game to watch. Fortunately for us we got the 3 points, otherwise I’m sure the USSF’s tune would be different.

Sure the conditions affected play. But the Costa Ricans have no ground to stand on. Afterall, when the game was stopped, their players and captain urged for the game to continue. You then can’t whine afterwards about the game if you insist on continuing only to lose.

If they wanted it stopped, then they would have filed an immediate captain’s protest with the referee in accordance with CONCACAF WCQ regs. They didn’t, ergo they didn’t want it stopped at the time, no matter what they say after the fact.

If that was how we decided the validity of games in CONCACAF, Costa Rica would forfeit the past decade of matches. Jamaica would forfeit half of theirs. El Salvador? Forget it.

The moment Costa Rica finished their new stadium, FIFA blocked Saprissa from being a venue unless major renovations were made.

The fact that we–USSF–have not said a word officially about the nonsense we play in is a testament to either giant envelopes of money being delivered to our federation headquarters or good will. You guess.

I’m glad your family enjoyed watching some men play in the snow. I can see how being there would have been fun, certainly memorable. For the football fans wanting to see the beautiful game, it wasn’t much of an experience to remember.

Like I said, if the USA loses 2-1 and the lasting impression is walking away drenched in snow-slush while the Ticos celebrate on our grass, I doubt the memory would be an altogether fond one.

You couldn’t be more wrong on watching this game. This was one of the more entertaining and memorable games I have seen the USMNT play, outside of any WC game. To each his own obviously, but I think you’re in the overwhelming minority if you think the game was not greatly entertaining!

All those times Costa Rica made the US play on crap fields and crap stadiums ?
And now they are going to be unprofessional over a snow game ?
It wasn’t up to the USMNT to cancel the games it’s up to the refs.

I hope the US reciprocates the gamesmanship. Schedule every Costa Rica game that falls during winter in Dicks Sporting goods. immediate psychological edge.

I think we’re going to win because this time they won’t have rickety old Saprissa to create an advantage. Nacional is an Olympic-style stadium with a big running track. There will be tons of space between the stands and the pitch, unlike the cramped Saprissa. The atmosphere will not be nearly as hostile or intimidating, and the field conditions will be much, much better. Our quality will show through, and we will get the 3 points.

I believe Herr Snowman and the US team will show CR what matters most is the US soccer effort, talent, strategy, etc. versus a snowy field, lousy turf, hostile crowd, etc. to get a very big USA WIN! Keep the US victory string going on Friday, we are all behind and cheering for you!!

I’d argue CR would have been at greater risk of losing 3 or 2 points at home the following game due to being more tired having less rest and prep time than their opponent. Also, the USA would have been at greater risk of not getting a point at Mexico, thus denying Mex 2 pts they needed, which is helping CR have some breathing room. And, there is no greater probability of winning if it’s not snowing if you are CR. Playing the USA at home is difficult if it’s snowing or if it’s not snowing. Just look at their home qualifying record dating back the last four WCQ cycles for proof. Lau ghably, CR is deluding themselves into thinking they would have had a big advantage playing the next day when the field could have been cleared. Sorry, you were still in the USA playing a team on the rise who has a history of defending the home turf pretty well in WCQers.

I don’t live anywhere near Denver but I was keeping tabs on the weather the week or so leading up to the game and it had been 50s-60s all week before the game. It just so happened that a blizzard rolled through THAT night. If the game had happened a week earlier the high was 76 degrees! And the Friday after was 67! (Per Accuweather.com)

Like others have noted, considering all the crap the USMNT gets subjected to in Latin America, I think the Costa Ricans should just deal with it.

It is going to be absolutely glorious when we beat them on Friday and finally shut them up about how they would’ve won that snow game if it hadn’t snowed. I’m psyched to watch the USA put them in their place.

Can something be done about listing the comments in reverse chronological order? English is not Hebrew, we don’t start at the bottom of the page. And what makes it doubly difficult is that the replies to comments actually go in chronological order! So when scrolling to the bottom of the page one finds that the very first comment has 12 replies to it, so then you have to scroll back up the page and struggle to find the original comment all the replies are made to. This is hard because the comments are not numbered, you can only tell by looking at the time the comment is made (in theory the replies are each indented but replies to replies are indented even more so finding the original comment by looking for the farthest to the left comment is not always easy). So, there we are if we want to make sense of the comments. Start at the bottom, scroll up to find the original comment, then read down, then back up to find the next comment and then back down- it’s insanity!

um, beIN Sport is offered by Fios, TWC, Comcast, DirectTV, Liberty, Bright House Networks, Atlantic Broadband, Dish, and Advanced Cable Communications in all areas these providers are located in.

i think it’s safe to say that excessive majority of households have Fios, TWC, Comcast, and DirectTV. Cox and AT&T look to be missing.

and like FSC, it is up to the customer to decide to pay for the Sports Tier the channel is located on. i agree beIN Sport is gonna have to model ESPN and NBC Sports (like FSC has now done), but for now it’s no different than GolTV.

Nice list Bryan but how many people actually get BeIn Sports in the US? I don’t know the actual figures but I know it’s low. Call me crazy but I thought we wanted to grow the game of soccer in this country, do we not?

Yes, you are right about the cable companies that offer BeIn but the # of households that currently have BeIn is very, very small. How can we grow the game and get the average person excited about this team if most people can’t see the game (unless like you said, pay for the premium sports channel package, and then have it available). This is our national team and it should be on a channel that most people actually have.

those statements are 100% inaccurate given all but Cox and AT&T offer the channel. meaning the overwhelming majority of US households have access to the game. it IS available. it IS being televised in most US cities.

i’m not saying it stinks that the US is on a channel that isn’t on the same tier as ESPN, NBC Sports, etc. i complained about that when i had FSC and GolTV. but as a soccer fan in the US, that’s just the reality of the situation and i ended up paying the $5/month that the Sports Tier cost to add on (FSC + is another story). obviously we are seeing soccer now moving to those more standard tiers, and beIN Sport will have to move there to survive, but this idea that most people in the USA don’t have access to the game is a misconception…they just haven’t paid for the Sports Tier.

of the top 5 providers, 3/5 offer beIN Sport nationally. from a subscribers standpoint, the Top 5 make up roughly 49 million people. roughly 40 million get beIN Sport as Cox and AT&T only make up 9 million while Comcast, TWC, and Fios make up the rest.

exactly. beIN Sport is offered in just about every household now. whether you want to pay for the Sports Tier, that is on you. but don’t complain about not having access to it when you do (unless you have Cox or AT&T).

I have ATT Uverse so of course I’m upset that I don’t get the game. Out of those millions of people you cited, how many people get the sports package? My opinion is that it’s best for the game in this country if the maximum number of people can see our National Team play.

EspinDOHla, my argument has nothing to do with who has the Sports Tier. the point is, IT IS OFFERED and to say the game is not available to most US homes is a flat out lie.

sure, we can have a separate debate about whether or not its in the best interest of the USMNT to have away games on channels that are on a Sports Tier. but guess what? no one complained this much when FSC had the USMNT rights. it’s a reality of soccer in the US.

be happy the trend is moving away from the Sports Tier and to the ESPN, NBC Sports, etc. model. like you said, that is going to be what is best for the future as soccer continues to grow. also, Costa Rican Federation is the one who apparently sold the rights to beIN Sports before ESPN or anyone else had a chance to counter. at least that is what ESPN claims. obviously USSF does not hold the rights to away games so it’s not really up to them.

but again, this argument was STRICTLY about the game being AVAILABLE in US households. and, the truth is, the game is available to the very large majority of Americans who have cable.

First, I am very much aware that Costa Rica’s FA can decide who to sell the rights to.

However, that doesn’t change the fact that I still wish the game was available to a wider audience. Even if BeIn is OFFERED to those 49 million, there are still a lot of people don’t get the channel they don’t get the sports tier. Or, like me, it’s not even offered. If I had the option to buy it, I would because I love the game. A lot of people who are not hardcore soccer fans just aren’t going to pay the extra money for BeIn. That’s too bad because watching our national team tear it up could attract a lot of people to the game. I’ve met tons of folks who first start following the game, get into MLS or European leagues, etc because they first started watching the USMNT.

Of course I am thrilled that soccer is moving to the NBC Sports, ESPN model. Isn’t that the point that I’m making…soccer in this country should be available to a wider audience.

“It blows my mind with the growth of soccer in this country that this game isn’t available in must households.”

BOTH THOSE STATEMENTS ARE WRONG. this game IS available in most households. this is not a conversation about it being annoying its on a Sports Tier. this is a conversation about the AVAILABILITY of the game. that’s it. nothing more. it has now turned into this monster, but the original post was about NOTHING more than the availability of the game on US TV.

i literally couldn’t be more clear about your point. despite it being AVAILABLE (the original conversation) to the large majority of cable subscribers, your issue is that probably a lot of them don’t buy that package. no one is saying otherwise. everyone agrees it would be better if all US games, home and away, were on ESPN. FSC failed because no one wanted to pay for it. so beIN Sport will likely face the same result if they don’t change. but again, that’s not what this conversation started out about. and it’s not what i responded to you about.

wow GW, you mad? wishing death on someone you’ve never met. that’s wonderful. have my comments boiled up so much hatred in you that you wish me dead? i’m not tr0llin at all. I just want talk about the availability of this game…I think you have some issue man.

bryan, I understand your point. The majority of households in America have access to BeIn sports. (Are you happy now?)

Nonetheless, the majority of households in America do not get the channel (although they have access to BeIn and it is AVAILABLE from their providers). That is a fact!

EspinDOHla – yes, i am very happy to see that, because that was the original point i responded to!!!! nothing more, nothing less. christ. i simply pointed out the statement that you and the OP wrote were factually incorrect. which they are. it wasn’t even meant to be snarky. just to inform.

from there, sure, we can have a conversation about if beIN Sport is the best channel to have US games. but again, who would argue against the point you are making?!?! it’s OBVIOUS. there is no need to even discuss it. most people who CAN get beIN Sport, and therefore have access to the game, CHOOSE not to buy it. that clearly shows EVERYONE would rather the game be a channel not in a Sports Tier.

your aren’t grasping the point we are making. the original point was the game was unavailable to the large majority of cable subscribers in the USA. that is what we are refuting because it’s 100% wrong.

you are now bringing up a second conversation. that conversation is that it sucks USMNT away games are on channels that require an additional Sports Tier. i’m willing to bet 100% of people would agree with that. no one is saying otherwise. but that is irrelevant to the conversation i responded to regarding the availability of the game to US cable subscribers.

Dikranovich – and what am i wrong about? please, go through it point by point. because i just provided research on the availability of the channel/game to US households. and the result? 40 out of 49 million cable subscribers (the Top 5) offer beIN Sport. you can’t deny that. that is a fact. so no, i’m not wrong.

whether or not people are paying for it, that’s another conversation and not ANYWHERE did i say the majority of people who have the channel actually pay for it. that, my friend, is a different conversation. and a legit conversation. it’s just not this one. i think we all agree most people DON’T pay for the Sports Tier beIN Sport is on…but it IS available. i hate that model just as much as the next guy, but that was not what i responded to nor what i have been arguing.

Correct Ben, and CR along with the other Central American countries that “hold out” for the highest bidder(s) and greed are only hurting themselves, by not allowing a much more widespread exposure worldwide for their OWN teams/countries. It sounds to me like a lose/lose proposition on the part of those countries in addition to us because of it.

it was a simple comment, that stated that it is to bad the game will not be available to most housholds in this country. HBO is available in my house, but showtime is not. so you can come over and watch game of thrones, but not dexter. if I paid for showtime, dexter would be available in my house, but I don’t, so its not.

im not so sure most americans would want to support al jeezera anyway.

as it stands, bein will not be available in most households this coming Friday, the original comment stands on its own, really without so much need for debate, yet im sure your fragile sensibilities will feel the need to respond further.

dikranovich – you are just being a troll. it is CLEAR that the definition of the word “available” is simply that. is the game available through your cable provider?

the answer to that question for the large majority of Americans who pay for cable is YES. 40 out of 49 million to be exact (when looking at the Top 5).

you are trying to define “availability” as not only having the option to watch the game, but to actually then consume that option by paying for the Sports Tier the channel is on. i think that definition is incorrect.

availability vs consumption. there are plenty of things available to me in life that i choose to not consume…but those things are still considered available…

dikranovich – you are just being a tr011. it is CLEAR that the definition of the word “available” is simply that. is the game available through your cable provider?

the answer to that question for the large majority of Americans who pay for cable is YES. 40 out of 49 million to be exact (when looking at the Top 5).

you are trying to define “availability” as not only having the option to watch the game, but to actually then consume that option by paying for the Sports Tier the channel is on. i think that definition is incorrect.

availability vs consumption. there are plenty of things available to me in life that i choose to not consume…but those things are still considered available…

dude, please, get real. the game is not going to be available to a majority of the households in our country. that’s just a fact. if the game was on NBC or ESPN, we would not be having this conversation, unless it was on ESPN ocho or something stupid like that.,,,lol

Luckily, I have BeIn because I upgraded my Comcast package to include phone service and I added all these premium channels for LESS money. Everyone else should be mad at ESPN for being too cheap with the bid. THEY WERE OUTBID by BeIn for the away game rights. They could have put in a higher bid but they didn’t. Fox and NBC also could have put in a higher bid but they too did not. Considering what ESPN made from the ratings of the last WC, it is galling that they did not submit a higher bid. Cheap bastages.

Really? “Most” of the US doesn’t get BeIN Sport? I sympathize with those who don’t get it, but there are always other ways of watching. Get to a bar, get to a Buffalo Wild Wings… heck, get to a Best Buy and hijack one of the display TVs and just hang out in the aisle.

Are complaints about TV access still viable in the age of the internet? Yeah, there is something nice about watching a game without having to remove annoying ads from the screen, having a dedicated, clear picture of the action, ect. But simple access to the game is far easier for US fans now than in the past. Think about how much the sport might have grown if the internet would have been around for Paul Caligiuri’s “Shot Heard ‘Round the World”?

Oh, and God bless rojadirecta and all the other fine stations that bring the beautiful game to average joes like myself who can only afford the internet package from our local cable companies.

how are people still confused on how away-game TV rights are given out? the Costa Rica Federation gets to sell the TV rights for this game, not USSF. they decided to choose beIN Sport who supposedly offered the most money. ESPN came out after the fact saying CR officials didn’t even allow ESPN, Fox, NBC, etc. to submit new bids and awarded the rights to beIN Sport.

it’s a slime ball move on their part and it is unfortunate. because even though the game is available in almost every house, the reality is a much smaller percentage actually pay for the channel. so if ESPN, Fox, or NBC were willing to beat beIN Sport’s bid, it would have been nice to see the CR officials allow that.

I have Direct TV and can get the game at home. Unfortunately, I won’t be at home but at a social function I paid money for a long time ago so I pretty much have to go. Frustrating, but that’s why they invented DVR’s altho I’d much rather watch live.

You are misinformed. Clearly, it snowed whenever Costa Rica had the ball. When the US had the ball, they were playing on a perfect pitch in 75 degree weather. You must not have watched the game. But, in all seriousness, I still don’t understand how they are complaining about this. If they won, they wouldn’t have said a word.

it’s times like these, when the USMNT gets the b.s treatment at an away venue that I wish the sport got more attention here, especially from the so-called “patriotic Americans” . Can you imaginze the outrage if an NFL team had to deal with this b.s. somewhere in Central America? We’d have F-18 and drones buzzing the Costa Rican sky day and night, Marines on the ground and they’d be installing grass at Saprissa in no time….

at least block their federation members from entry to the US for a long period of time-that’ll quickly send a message

Yeah. Let’s make concrete fields and a lack of game balls a diplomatic issue. Might want to withhold international aid while we’re at it. I would support calculated missile strikes on Brazil, Germany, Argentina, Belgium and any other threat to a US World Cup win next year. You know what, just move the event to Merica so our team isn’t inconvenienced. Oh…and why can’t they just speak English?!

You guys on this site take things far to literal. Clearly the point of the statement was to express his/her desire for futbol to be as relevant as our American Football in the USA. So when situations like the gamesmenship of the Costa Ricans happen it become a more nationally relevent story. I.e top news story on ESPN or topic of discussion on talk radio etc

If there were any ideas of looking past this game to Mexico I don’t think there are now. Its important to go out and make it clear to Costa Rica they were lucky the game in Denver was even as close as it was.

For CR to be bitching about this still is pretty goddam rich but not surprising. As I remember it, the CR players and staff were trying to keep the ref from stopping the game at around the 70th minute or so when they had that little conference. CR also could have made a complaint at any time during the game that would have given FIFA a chance to overturn the result, but they didn’t. They liked their chances…until the final whistle blew.

It is mind boggling that the Costa Ricans are freaking out about this so much because the players could have easily protested during the game and they CHOSE to continue. The fans/media seem to be overlooking this slightly large fact.

People keep saying that Costa Rica asked the ref for the game to continue yet their captain, Jorge Luis Pinto (coach) and Eduardo Li (head of the CR Fed) have said otherwise ever since the game back in March.

I’d like to see some proof either way to see if they did or did not ask for the game to be continued.

yeah, the announcers were saying that on ESPN but i think they were mistaken because CR made it very clear they asked for the game to be halted. that conversation was them saying the game needed to be canceled, not just halted while they clear the field.

No one seemed to have any idea what would happen if the match was stopped either. The announcers seemed to think they’d start over 0-0 if it was suspended. Others seemed to think it’d start where ever they stopped.
Everyone was saying no one ever plays in snow then a couple weeks later I saw Roma play in it with the field covered. With so many moving parts in soccer everyone is going to side with doing what they can to get a scheduled game in.

yeah, it was pure chaos. and frankly, given we knew it was going to snow that night, how did ESPN Analysts not think to figure out the rules BEFORE hand? by the time their broadcast started, it was already snowing pretty good. no one thought to check out what would happen in the event the ref halted the game? or was it an issue of FIFA just not having the rules spelled out clearly and easy to find?

If my memory is correct, it was still snowing the next day os if the game had been canceled it would have had to been played on a Sunday and then both teams had to go out of the country for the next qualifier on Tuesday. It would have been close to impossible logistically since their travel plans would have had to been adjusted at the last minute on the fly (no pun intended) and there is no telling what flights would have been available on a Sunday night in Denver. If CR had won they wouldn’t have complained at all and I doubt the US would have since they picked the venue. Finally, regarding Klinsmann’s comment, in Colorado in March you could get sun and 60 degrees, rain, or snow. In fact, from my experience, that much snow is unusual in March. Rain is just as likely. Much ado about something that is moot anyway.

Big point here is that if CR had made a formal complaint in front of the US capt. that the game be suspended, during the game, not after they lost, they would have had standing to ask FIFA to overturn the result. They did not.

well, see, that is why it’s irrelevant either way. no matter what the CR players were saying to the ref, no one filed the complaint to the FIFA official in front of the US capt., etc.

but i think it was cleared up that the CR players were indeed telling the ref to cancel the game. but sadly for them, that was not the process they needed to take and by the time they realized that, it was too late.

I don’t think that clears it whether or not they tried to keep the game going. I clearly remember it seeming they wanted to play, but of course we don’t know what was said on the field. I wouldn’t take CR players/coach word for it after making a losing bet, and if they didn’t know what they had to do to lodge a complaint they don’t deserve to be coaching a nat’l team.

oh right, my bad. good point. it only clears up their excuse that they said they were telling the ref to stop the game. if that is true, then they were dumb for yelling at the ref and not filing the complaint like you said.

No… It means they didn’t inform the ref that they wanted play suspended and/or would protest the decision not to. Either way, they didn’t say the magic words, so they need to seriously STFU about this.

Is it surprising that after the loss, then the tone and answer changes? Of course they won’t admit that the asked for the game to proceed. But the cameras and refs show and tell a different story. As others have stated, once the game was stopped, if the Costa Ricans has even uttered they did not feel comfortable continuing, it would have stopped. It did not.

Furthermore, after playing in shitty, unkempt stadiums for years in Central America during the day in the grueling heat, it’s nice to have something go our way. It’s called homefield advantage for a reason.

Exactly. That is what Honduras did when they scheduled their match against us in the heat and humidity in San Pedro Sula rather than at night. Every team tries to practice some level of gamesmanship on their opponents. If the game is at home, you might as well as try to take any (legal) advantage you can get.

My opinion regarding Costa Ricans changed after this match. My wife and I actually honeymooned in C.R. It was a beautiful magical place. That being said, Saprissa Stadium is clearly not. It was a hell hole complete with a hard astroturf pitch, and battery and urine bag throwing fans. IMO, whining at the US for the weather is crybaby tactics. Costa RIca should be mad at CONCACAF. It was their decision and not the US MNTs. And yet, the Costa Ricans are claiming WE cheated. That and they are completely revisionist in whether or not they wanted to stop the match. They were confident that they were going to get a result in Denver and ONLY AFTER they lost did they throw a hissy fit and tried to protest after the fact. Losers.

Discussion on the field took place almost right in front of me and for everything anyone could see, CR players wanted to keep playing. They had had the momentum building in their favor in the maybe 10 mins of the game leading up to that point and were gesturing as if they wanted to hurry. Also they didn’t follow the route of their captain informing the center ref of any issue in the presence of our captain. They have zero argument — less than zero if you then factor in that they also didn’t follow the protest guidelines following the match.

Not true that they said they wanted it cancelled. How is it that they say they were adamant about that then failed to log a proper complaint in the right amount of time. What happened was that the CR players said to continue to the ref then when they lost and the ref agreed that they said continue they tried to change their story so that they could try and lodge a complaint after they took so much bad press in CR. By then they had been so wiishy washy on the subject that no one was going to believe them anyway. Now they are just being whiny and pathetic about it,

Per CONCACAF WCQ regs, the first step of a protest is that it must be filed during or immediately after the match with the match referee. CR didn’t. That’s why their eventual protest to CONCACAF was denied. They didn’t complain during or immediately after the match to the referee.

What all you people seem to forget is that all Americans grow up playing in the snow. There is regularly at least one foot of snow covering our soccer fields year round—and in places like Denver or Seattle or Florida it is more like three feet. Clint Dempsey, for example, as a native of Nacogdoches, Texas, normally experienced yearly snowfall totaling 8-10 feet. Hercules Gomez, a native of Oxnard, California, was actually raised inside an igloo and now plies his trade in Liga MX where typically half of all games are played in complete blizzards. And as everyone knows, Graham Zusi was born over 3,000 years ago in Longwood, Florida, where the permafrost keeps him in a semi-cryogenic state, thus prolonging his life (and, strangely, conferring the ability to communicate telepathically with seals). The list goes on and on.

The bottom line: US players had a significant unfair advantage playing in the snow because they all play under such conditions all the time all throughout their lives.

Are you crazy? 3′ of snow in Florida Seattle and Texas you must not be from the US. Yes places like the New England and the Rockies have good snow fall but rarely do we run into this during the MLS season. The game was sloppy on both sides but not much different then playing in a hard down fall. The filed was slippers and wet what the difference, it was colder?

You guys can complain all you want but Costa Rica now beat you guys. In regards to soccer, im Tico. That was a trap and you all know it. Putting Costa Rica in Colorado where it very well could snow. Next year I hope USA plays in Puntarenas at 12pm when it is the most hot. Then YOU all will be complaining.